What’s abusive about it? You’d rather he lose more karma from a mistake that he’s already learned from?
In general, I’m in favor of people acknowledging past mistakes, rather than pretending that nothing their past selves did was in error. Even when the acknowledgment is of the form “oops, I suppose it was a mistake to voice this opinion in this forum” rather than “my opinion was wrong”.
I’d really prefer we didn’t have a social norm that changing your mind in response to other people’s input is a bad thing, even when sometimes people learn a different lesson than the one we wanted them to. Besides, is it really so much worse for someone to learn the lesson “this sort of thing results in karma loss” vs “that comment didn’t contribute to the site and wasn’t worth posting”? Are they really such different lessons?
I have not deleted any comments. Indeed, all my comments show up in my view of the thread as this comment is posted. Maybe they were deleted by a moderator and then put back?
What’s abusive about it? You’d rather he lose more karma from a mistake that he’s already learned from?
It appears that the original comment was made with the intent of immediately retracting it. “Learning from a mistake” is not a reasonable description of that behavior. But Larks’ solution is not a good idea because two wrongs don’t make a right (in this circumstance).
That said, I agree with you that retraction of a comment that one is surprised is heavily down-voted or otherwise learns later is wrong is a very reasonable reaction.
Maybe I just overvalue karma. But I like the local norm that posts stand or fall on their own merits, not bad things the author has done elsewhere. The original criticism by Vladimir_Nesov was sufficient punishment, and even if it wasn’t, the next obvious intervention (the one you described) just seems excessive to me. Likewise, I think the downvotes you received for raising the question is more negative stimuli than necessary, given evand’s comment.
What’s abusive about it? You’d rather he lose more karma from a mistake that he’s already learned from?
In general, I’m in favor of people acknowledging past mistakes, rather than pretending that nothing their past selves did was in error. Even when the acknowledgment is of the form “oops, I suppose it was a mistake to voice this opinion in this forum” rather than “my opinion was wrong”.
I’d really prefer we didn’t have a social norm that changing your mind in response to other people’s input is a bad thing, even when sometimes people learn a different lesson than the one we wanted them to. Besides, is it really so much worse for someone to learn the lesson “this sort of thing results in karma loss” vs “that comment didn’t contribute to the site and wasn’t worth posting”? Are they really such different lessons?
He posted and immediately retracted. The retraction wasn’t because he’d learned from his mistake, it was to protect himself from punishment.
Now that he’s deleted his comment mine looks asine, as it lacks context. However, I will not retract mine.
I have not deleted any comments. Indeed, all my comments show up in my view of the thread as this comment is posted. Maybe they were deleted by a moderator and then put back?
Maybe they are a basilisk?
My apologies—I retract the criticism of your deletion.
It appears that the original comment was made with the intent of immediately retracting it. “Learning from a mistake” is not a reasonable description of that behavior. But Larks’ solution is not a good idea because two wrongs don’t make a right (in this circumstance).
That said, I agree with you that retraction of a comment that one is surprised is heavily down-voted or otherwise learns later is wrong is a very reasonable reaction.
What else do you suggest we do when people defect in n-player prisoners’ dilemmas? (Or do you doubt the relevance of the comparison?)
Maybe I just overvalue karma. But I like the local norm that posts stand or fall on their own merits, not bad things the author has done elsewhere. The original criticism by Vladimir_Nesov was sufficient punishment, and even if it wasn’t, the next obvious intervention (the one you described) just seems excessive to me. Likewise, I think the downvotes you received for raising the question is more negative stimuli than necessary, given evand’s comment.